[PD] OT: Poll: Csounds or SuperCollider or Chuck

[Ricardo Fabbri]

Hi Epic,

I am not a specialist, but I know from my brother and other
experienced composers that one big reason for switching between these
is simply the different ideas and possibilities they sparkle on the
composer's mind. Once they have maxed-out on using and exploring Pd,
they switch to the text-based alternatives you mention to explore
different possibilities. But that is an all-encompassing approach from
very advanced musicians. One more or less concrete thing I can tell
you is that it seems Chuck as a language fits many people's mindset better than
SuperCollider, perhaps because of the syntax style and how it allows
for better live performance.

Anyways, these are just my 2c to get the ball rolling.

Ricardo Fabbri
--
Linux registered user #175401
labmacambira.sf.net



On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Epic Jefferson
<jeffreyconcepcion at gmail.com> wrote:
> After the recent post about CsoundforLive, it resparked my interest in
> trying out one of the text based audio synthesis programs. Since it seems
> like a very steep learning curve to start learning any of these(Csounds,
> SuperCollider or Chuck) I just wanted to see if anyone here has had any
> experience with any of these and what your verdict was.
> I'd like to start a sort of opinion poll:
>
> How do they compare against each other?
> How do they match up to Pd for your needs?
> What sort of things can be achieved in these programs that can't be achieved
> in Pd, if any?
>
> --
> www.epicjefferson.com
> www.avmachinists.org Puerto Rico based Art Collective/ Non-Profit Org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pd-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
>
>